Thursday, February 14, 2013

It appears that ICAO is thinking about banning ion batteries shipped as cargo via passenger air. There's no doubt the recent Boeing 787 problems have elevated the topic. If ICAO bans them, it will be interesting to see how quickly IATA will react. Also, the reaction of DOT will be interesting as well.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

One thing that shippers are always concerned about are
the training requirements found in the various regulations.Typically, if the auditor calls, one of the
first items on the agenda will be compliance with the training requirements.

The training requirements of DOT occupy Subpart H of Part
172 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations.The requirements are straightforward.Testing is required.Recurrent
training is required.Training records
must be kept.Certain training
components are required.

A shipper using the DOT regulations for a highway shipment
rarely has questions as to the training requirements.

But what are the training requirements if you ship using
the alternative regulations, such as the IMDG Code, or the ICAO Technical
Instructions? (typically through the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations).

It is true that ICAO/IATA and the IMDG documents have
training chapters or subsections.These
requirements are based on the UN Model Regulations.But experienced shippers know that there are
subtle differences between the DOT requirements and those of the UN.

For example, DOT states that a hazmat employee may
perform functions prior to the completion of training provided they are
supervised by someone who has been trained.But the employee must receive the training within 90 days after
employment or a change in job function.

The “90 day window” does not exist in the international
regulations.

This biggest difference seems to be in recurrent
training.DOT requires training once
every 3 years, and the international rules state every 24 months.

Clearly this is a controversial discrepancy.

Who is right?

Whether you agree with the logic or not, the answer lies
in Subpart C of Part 171 of the DOT regulations.This subpart, known as “Authorization and
Requirements for the use of International Transport Standards and Regulations”
addresses training issues.Specifically,
section §171.22(g)(2) states that if using an international standard, the
shipper is subject to the training requirements in subpart H of part 172 of
this subchapter, including function-specific training in the use of the
international transport standards and regulations.

Whether one agrees with this or not, simply put, the only
training requirements that can be enforced in the US are the DOT requirements,
which include the 3 year recurrent training requirement.

The shipper of course can stay on a 2 year recurrent
training schedule which is more conservative than 3 years, but it appears that
all that can be enforced are the DOT requirements for training.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Every two years, PHMSA publishes a final rule in the "215" docket series. In this case it's HM-215L. As a training organization we have to stress that it's important to focus on the various dates associated with this type of docket.

In this case:Voluntary compliance is authorized as of January 1, 2013Delayed compliance is authorized until January 1, 2014

Our experience in training is that these dates can confuse a shipper, so caution is urged. It does create a more complicated scheme for 2013.
This is a big document, stretching for 114 pages. For a copy, click here.

The ORM-D issue continues to generate much interest. Our experience as a training organization is that most US shippers do NOT ship consumer commodities by air under the DOT regulations. But by highway, it's another story entirely.

On Monday, January 7, 2013, the transition period for shipments traveling under ORM-D designation was extended until December 31, 2020.

Other issues are discussed in this final rule as well. Click here to view the Federal Register document.